Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

principle, upon which a subsequent purchaser is charged by a notice of a prior equitable title is strikingly analogous, if not precisely identical with it.

[blocks in formation]

NOTE. Since the publication of our June number we have received from Mr. Justice BULLITT a complaint of some verbal inaccuracies in the copy of his opinion, from which our report of this case was taken. We therefore subjoin the passages as corrected by him.-EDS. AM. LAW REG.

"If Congress had the power to enact this statute, it can adopt such measures as may be necessary to carry it into effect. It is probable that, in order to carry its provisions into effect, it will be necessary not only to defeat and disperse the Southern armies in the field, but to subjugate the people of the Southern States, and hold them in a condition of permanent subjection to the government of a nominal Union, to be controlled by the people of the other States, unless they also should lose their liberties in an effort to subjugate others. It seems certain that the framers of the Constitution did not mean to clothe Congress with the power thus to destroy the Government." P. 483.

"We are satisfied that if the statements of this answer are true, those principles of the common law which suspend an alien enemy's right of action during war, apply to this case, and forbid our courts from aiding the appellee to recover money which might be used to support the war against the United States." P. 488.

ABSTRACTS OF RECENT ENGLISH DECISIONS.1

Foreign Law.-A woman who has become by the law of France personally liable for her husband's debts, and has paid them after his death, and who is by the same law entitled to sue a defendant in her own right to recover the money so paid, has a primâ facie right to bring such action in this country without first taking out administration here. She is entitled to the like privilege as a donee by the law of France of her deceased husband's rights of action. Vanquelin vs. Bouard, 12 W. R. 128; 9 L. T., N. S. 582.-C. P.

Contract-Within the Statute of Frauds-Primary Liability.-The liability of a party who advertises generally a reward for information to any one not named in the advertisement, who shall first give the information asked for, is a liability at common law, and not a contract within the Statute of Frauds. Williams vs. Byrnes, 1 Moore, P. C. C., N. S., 154;

8 L. T., N. S. 69.

In Restraint of Trade-Validity and Breach.-A covenant by a vendor of a business, not to carry on the same business within 200 miles of a certain place, is not unreasonable, as in restraint of trade, if by reason of the character of the business such a limit of exclusion is necessary for the protection of the purchaser. Harms vs. Parsons, 9 Jur., N. S. 145; 32 L. J., Chanc. 247; 11 W. R. 250; 7 L. T., N. S. 815-R.

A. undertook to manage the business of B., a chemist, and agreed that he, A., would not carry on the business of a chemist either in his own name or for his own benefit, or in the name or names or for the benefit of any other person, within seven miles of the place. He afterwards solicited orders for another chemist within the seven miles: Held, that this was not a breach of his agreement. Clark vs. Watkins, 9 Jur. N. S., 142; 11 W. R. 319; 8 L. T., N. S. 8.-L. J.

or in

A covenant not to be engaged in a specific trade, any matter or thing whatsoever in anywise relating thereto," within a given district, does not prevent the covenantor from lending money to a person engaged in such trade within the limits, upon mortgage of his trade premises,

1 From the Digest of English Decisions for 1863. The letters at the end of the paragraphs indicate the courts in which the cases were decided, and the Jurist, Law Times, Law Journal, Weekly Reporter, and other publications in which they are reported.

although he may know that the mortgagor has no means of paying the debt except out of the profits of the business. Bird vs. Lake; Bird vs. Turner, 1 H. & M. 338.

A mortgagor expressly charging the debt upon such profits, would be a breach of covenant. Id.

Semble; also, there is nothing in such a covenant to prevent the covenantor from buying any number of houses within the district, fitting them up and selling them for the purpose of the trade in question, provided he has no direct interest in the business carried on in them after such sales respectively. Id.

Copyright (in Engravings).—The piracy of a picture or engraving by the process of photography, or by any other process, mechanical or otherwise, whereby copies may be indefinitely multiplied, is within the statutes for the protection of artists and engravers. Gambart vs. Ball, 14 C. B., N. S. 306; 9 Jur., N. S. 1059; 32 L. J., C. P. 166; 11 W. R. 699; 8 L. T., N. S. 426.

Copyright (in Novels).-Certain novels, the copyright in which belonged to T., were dramatized, and the dramas, containing some of the most important scenes and incidents of the novels, copied verbatim, were printed and published by L. On an application by T. for an injunction to restrain the sale of the dramas: Held, that printing and selling the dramas was an infringement of T.'s copyright. Tinsley vs. Lacy, 32 L. J., Chanc. 535; 11 W. R. 876.-V. C. W.

If a plaintiff shows that his copyright has been infringed, the court will grant an injunction without proof of actual damage. Id.

Coroner Privilege-A coroner holding an inquest on a dead body, is not liable to an action for words falsely and maliciously spoken by him in his address to the jury. Thomas vs. Churton, 2 B. & S. 475.

Covenant-Construction and Operation-A covenant to bequeath a sum of money constitutes a specialty debt against the covenantor's estate, and is not satisfied by the mere insertion of such a bequest in his will. Graham vs. Wickham, 9 Jur., N. S 702; 11 W. R. 1009; 8 L. T., N. S. 679.-L. J.

The covenantee being the son of the covenantor, the covenant is not satisfied by an appointment under a power to appoint to children contained in the covenantor's marriage settlement. Id.

ABSTRACTS OF RECENT AMERICAN DECISIONS.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.1

Negotiable Paper-Signature as "Cashier"-Parol Evidence to explain. Where negotiable paper is drawn to a person by name with addition of "Cashier" to his name, but with no designation of the particular bank of which he was cashier, parol evidence is allowable to show that he was the cashier of a bank which is plaintiff in the suit, and that in taking the paper he was acting as cashier and agent of that corporation: Baldwin vs. Bank of Newbury.

Decree in Admiralty-Reversal for Irregularity.-Although the language of a decree in admiralty may declare a decision which might not be capable of being supported, still, if it is obvious from subsequent parts of the record that no error has been committed, the Court will not reverse for this circumstance.

Ex. Gr. Where a decree allowed a certain sum for repairs to a vessel, and rejected (improperly perhaps) a claim for demurrage, the decree was not reversed on that account; it appearing from a subsequent part of the record that the judge had in fact considered the sum he allowed for repairs, eo nomine, was too large for repairs simply, but was "about just" for repairs and demurrage together: Sturgis vs. Clough.

Negotiable Bonds-Municipal Subscription to Stock, &c.-Authority of-An authority given by Act of Legislature to a city corporation to subscribe for stock in a railway company "as fully as any individual,” authorizes also the issue by the city of its negotiable bonds in payment of the stock. The opinion of the Supreme Court of a State taking this view of an Act of Assembly passed by that state approved: Seybert vs. Pittsburgh. Municipal Subscriptions to Railroads, &c.-Constitutional Law-Contracts entered into on faith of Decisions of Court afterwards overruledDeference by this Court to Decisions of State Courts on State Laws.-By a series of decisions of the Supreme Court of Iowa prior to that, A. D. 1859, in The State ex rel. The Burlington and Missouri River Railroad Co. vs. Walpello Co. (13 Iowa 388), the right of the Legislature of that state to authorize municipal corporations to subscribe to railroads extending beyond the limits of the city or county, and to issue bonds accordingly,

1 From J. W. Wallace, Esq., Reporter, to appear in Vol. I. of his Reports.

was settled in favor of the right; and those decisions meeting with the approbation of this court, and being in harmony with the adjudications of sixteen states of the Union, will be regarded as a true interpretation of the constitution and laws of the state, so far as relate to bonds issued and put upon the market during the time that those decisions were in force. The fact that the Supreme Court of Iowa now holds that those decisions were erroneous, and ought not to have been made, and that the Legislature of the state had no such power as former courts decided that it had, can have no effect upon transactions in the past, however it may affect those in the future: Gelpcke et al. vs. Dubuque.

Although it is the practice of this Court to follow the latest settled adjudications of the state courts giving constructions to the laws and constitutions of their own states, it will not necessarily follow decisions which may prove but oscillations in the course of such judicial settlement. Nor will it follow any adjudication to such an extent as to make a sacrifice of truth, justice, and law: Id.

Municipal bonds with coupons payable to "bearer," having, by universal usage and consent, all the qualities of commercial paper, a party recovering on the coupons will be entitled to the amount of them with interest and exchange at the place where, by their terms, they are made payable: Id.

Aliens-Power to hold Lands-Law of Rhode Island relating to.—The well-settled principle that aliens may take land by deed or devise, and hold against any one but the sovereign until office found, holds in Rhode Island as elsewhere; not being affected by that statute which allows them to hold land, "provided" they previously obtain a license from the Probate Court Cross vs. De Valle.

Although equity will, in some cases, interfere to assert and protect future rights, as, ex. gr., to protect the estate of a remainderman from waste by the tenant for life, or to cut down an estate claimed to be a fee to a life interest only, where the language, rightly construed, gives but an interest for life; or will, at the request of trustees asking protection under a will, and to have a construction of the will and the direction of the court as to the disposition of the property, yet it will not decree in thesi as to the future. rights of parties not before the court or in esse: Id.

Langdale vs. Briggs (39 Eng. Law and Eq. 214), followed and approved, distinguished from Lorilard vs. Coster and Hawley vs. James (5 Paige 172, 442): Id.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »